Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-09-Speech-1-200-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110509.22.1-200-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"−
Madam President, I would like to thank everyone who has participated in the debate. It has been difficult. Some points that were taken up by Mrs Quisthoudt-Rowohl and others relate to security and fairness. That is precisely what we are all agreed on: investments must be fair, people should be treated fairly and we must have a reasonable level of security. At the same time, we cannot over-protect them like molly-coddled infants. It is like a minefield sometimes; we take hits occasionally and we develop our awareness. On the other hand, the risks must be reasonably predictable and we must be able to understand what risks we are taking. If we are too over-protective, we will retain our old industries and miss out on the change and renewal that we need because we do not dare to take new decisions. That would be unfortunate. Therefore, I do not quite understand the Commissioner’s criticism of some of the compromises that are being tabled again here, as we refer to the Treaty and you are the ones who interpret how it is to be applied. We are very well aware that you cannot review every single agreement and query everything, but can only look at serious violations.
It is also good that we are in agreement that Articles 5 and 6 should be retained. It would be unfortunate if the Commission’s only means of querying an agreement were to be to take the matter to the European Court of Justice. If an agreement is called into question and the European Court of Justice says that the agreement is invalid, hundreds of agreements would suddenly become invalid without warning. That would certainly not be a practice that would result in legal certainty. It is important for Articles 5 and 6 to be retained.
I completely agree with Mr Caspary that our negotiations should be conducted quickly. Irrespective of how the vote goes tomorrow, it is important that we conduct the negotiations quickly. I have already spoken to the Hungarian Presidency and it is ready and willing to deal with this matter as soon as we have voted. It could also conceive of a decision at first reading, but it does not look as if that will be the case here.
I do not think that the Earl of Dartmouth need worry that the Greens will take over investment policy. There are many forces that wish to keep it precisely as it has been for the last 50 years. I have to say that even if you admire our political capability to get proposals through, please do not exaggerate it. For my part, I admire your rhetorical skills. With their help, perhaps we could get even more green policy through.
As I have already said, we will have to vote this week and see how it goes. I would like to thank those involved and also the Hungarian Presidency, which I have met with on a number of occasions."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples